> > CSS Properties for sub-module: Styles For Optional Data
> > (For @media aural)
> > Name:
> > 'play'
> > CSS Values:
> > [ normal | optional | none ]+
> > Initial value:
> > 'normal'
>
> Just aural? It may be useful with other "stream" media, e.g. some
> implementations of the braille media type.
Very good point. How would I go about expressing that? Really it's for any
time dependant media.
> Some of the properties
> currently applicable only to aural media could IMO easily be applied to
> other media where the content available to the user at any given moment is
> very small and advanced automatically - for instance, the pause and cue
> properties. (Perhaps another value is required on the paged/continuous
> media group axis?)
Such as what?
> [...]
> > Name: alt.
> > Provides an alternative content for User Agents to render if they find
the
> > current content unrenderable. Can also be used in conunction with the
'skip'
> > property to provide a frag ID or URI to skip to when styled content is
> > bypassed. <uri> (URI for the alternative content), or 'none' (none).
>
> The first meaning is useful. Primarily, I suppose, (unless I have
> misunderstood) in user style sheets in order to deal with content that
> does not fall back nicely, in which case it should probably have the same
> set of allowed values as the content property. Of course, it could easily
> be abused by authors, but it is hardly unique in that respect.
Yes, that's the problem with practically anything develped for the purpose
f "good"! The WAI really think we need alt for everything, and putting the
alt property in CSS means we can use it with current HTML.
> The second I am not so sure about. I feel it requires too much knowledge
> of the document to which it applies, and could result in skipping in
> convoluted and confusing ways. It _should_ suffice simply to skip to the
> end of the element to be bypassed - i.e. for the skip property to allow
> the user to do the equivalent of setting "display: none".
No, well not for aural media anyway: skiping to the next element means
skipping to the next piece of renderable information. Specifying an alt is
another way of specifying the next bit of rnderable data. You are totally
right in saying that it can be severely abused, but I don't condone the
abuse of this system! Nothing is ever foolproof. Almost all CSS properties
can be misused, and are often done so.
> Quite apart from
> that, you might want to be able to skip something which might be
> unrenderable, thus requiring alternative content if not skipped.
Yes, you could kind of import it into the document, but you could still set
these properties seprately from each other. Just set the alt: property, or
just set the skip: property. That should clear that up!
I hope the technical aspect of the proposal was sound? If so, this proposal
to me seems very promising. The few criticisms that are valid are:
1) It will be easy to abuse.
But then, so is most of CSS1/2/3
2) It will be hard to implement correctly on the client (UA) side.
Well, that is up to the UA to sort out. CSS only provides a stlye, not a
means for rendering and applying that style!
Therefore, I don't see any real problems with it at all. If there are any
further problems, the benefits of accessibility will *far* outweigh them
anyway.
I'm not saying that my proposal is perfect - far from it! I'm saying the
idea behind it: proving accessibility, is essential. The proposal will need
further discussion within the CSS community, but apart from Mr. Hickson (and
yourself), I'm not sure who's listening...
Kindest Regards,
Sean B. Palmer
President and Founder
WAP Tech Info - http://www.waptechinfo.com/